In a case of first impression, the Second District Appellate Court has ruled that anti-stacking language in a UIM policy will not limit multiple wrongful death beneficiaries to a single UIM limit.  In Economy Premium Assurance Company v. Jackson, 393 Ill.App.3d 929 (2nd Dist. 2009), the son of divorced parents was killed in a collision caused by an underinsured motorist.  Each parent had a separate automobile policy containing UIM coverage, and both insurers contended that the parents’ recoveries for the death of their son must be limited to a single UIM limit by virtue of the anti-stacking language in the policies.

The insurers reasoned that under Illinois law, the parents’ claims for the death of their son could only be brought under the Wrongful Death Act, and that the Act provided for only a single claim that must be brought in the name of the decedent’s estate.  They reasoned that since there was only one claim, it was governed by the anti-stacking provisions of the policies and the estate could not aggregate the limits of both policies.

The Appellate Court disagreed, finding that each parent had a right to seek recovery for his or her own damages under the Wrongful Death Act.  Based on this analysis, the Appellate Court concluded that the anti-stacking provisions would not apply; rather, the decedent’s mother and father each had a separate claim and were entitled to recover the full UIM limit of their respective policies.

The Appellate Court’s opinion in this case is without precedent in Illinois law.  Although the Court decided the issue within the somewhat narrow context of UIM insurance, a similar analysis could potentially be applied to trigger multiple policy limits under other liability policies in wrongful death cases.